Decide which cause mattered most, and say why
Grade 7 Social Studies Worksheet - Building Confidence
Circle the best answer.
Read this first
Use this
The Great Fire of London, 1666 (cards A to C; summaries in our words). Card A, the diary of Samuel Pepys, a navy official who watched the fire, written in September 1666: he wrote that a strong wind drove the flames, that the houses were old timber ones built close together, and that officials at first did little to stop it. Card B, a museum summary: the fire began on the night of September 2, 1666, at a baker's shop in Pudding Lane, and burned for four days. It destroyed about 13,200 houses and 87 parish churches. Card C, the Rebuilding Act of 1667: new houses in London had to be built of brick or stone, and the main streets were to be widened.
Pepys watched the fire. What is the value of card A, and its limit, Ari asks?
- He saw it as it happened, but he wrote from one person's view
- He was a navy official, so his diary cannot tell us about a fire
- He saw it as it happened, so he knew each cause of the fire
- He wrote years afterward, so he could judge which cause mattered most
A student says, "Card B shows the baker's shop was the only cause of the damage." How strong is that claim, Esme asks?
- Strong: the fire began at the baker's shop, so nothing else mattered
- Strong: card B says the baker caused the fire on purpose
- Weak: a museum summary cannot say where the fire began
- Weak: card B names the start, and card A names causes of its spread
Which cause could London change before the next fire, Jun asks?
- The date of the first spark in Pudding Lane
- How houses were built and how wide the streets were
- The direction and strength of the wind on the night
- The size of the baker's shop in Pudding Lane
What does card C show that lawmakers learned from the fire, Kira asks?
- That the wind was the sole cause and could not be helped
- That timber houses close together made a fire easier to spread
- That brick and stone were cheaper than timber
- That bakers had set the fire on purpose and should be punished
How do cards A and C fit together, Luz asks?
- The law shows that Pepys was right about each cause of the fire
- They do not fit, because a diary and a law are not the same kind of source
- Pepys names timber houses close together, and the law changes both
- Pepys blames the wind, and the law blames the baker
A new record shows the summer of 1666 was very dry. How does it fit the cards, Milo asks?
- It shows the fire began because of the dry summer, not at the bakery
- It adds a cause: dry timber burns more easily, helping the fire spread
- It adds nothing, because card A already names the wind
- It shows the drought was the main cause and the wind did not matter
A student says, "Card A proves the officials started the fire." How strong is that claim, Noah asks?
- Strong: card A says the officials did little, so they must have begun it themselves
- Weak: card A says officials did little to stop it, not that they started it
- Weak: card A is one man's diary, so it says nothing about officials
- Strong: Pepys was a navy official, so he knew who began it
About 13,200 houses burned in four days. About how many houses burned each day on average, Pia asks?
- About 330 houses
- About 52,800 houses
- About 4,400 houses
- About 3,300 houses
What changed in London's rules after the fire, Tala asks?
- Nothing changed, because London had followed brick and stone rules before
- New houses had to be built of brick or stone, and main streets were widened
- New houses had to be built of timber, and main streets were narrowed
- Timber was banned in any building and bakers were sent out of London
Using cards A and B, which pair of causes helped the fire spread, Zee asks?
- A strong wind and the Rebuilding Act of 1667 for new houses
- A baker's shop in Pudding Lane and the date of September 2
- A strong wind and old timber houses built close together
- Wide streets and brick houses near the river and the bridge